and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Show Tags

25 Sep 2008, 03:33

No one who lacks knowledge of a subject is competent to pass judgment on that subject. Since political know-how is a matter, not of adhering to technical rules, but of insight and style learned through apprenticeship and experience, only seasoned politicians are competent to judge whether a particular political policy is fair to all.A major weakness of the argument is that it

A. relies on a generalization about the characteristic that makes someone competent to pass judgment

B. fails to give specific examples to illustrate how political know-how can be acquired

C. uses the term apprenticeship to describe what is seldom a formalized relationship

D. equates political know-how with understanding the social implications of political policies

E. assumes that when inexperienced politicians set policy they are guided by the advice of more experienced politicians

Show Tags

25 Sep 2008, 04:36

Nihit wrote:

No one who lacks knowledge of a subject is competent to pass judgment on that subject. Since political know-how is a matter, not of adhering to technical rules, but of insight and style learned through apprenticeship and experience, only seasoned politicians are competent to judge whether a particular political policy is fair to all.A major weakness of the argument is that it

A. relies on a generalization about the characteristic that makes someone competent to pass judgment

B. fails to give specific examples to illustrate how political know-how can be acquired

C. uses the term apprenticeship to describe what is seldom a formalized relationship

D. equates political know-how with understanding the social implications of political policies

E. assumes that when inexperienced politicians set policy they are guided by the advice of more experienced politicians

Show Tags

25 Sep 2008, 06:27

On the 1st look, A seems to be right but, the author, even though he is generalizing, is also saying that political know-how, unlike other disciplines in life, cannot be learnt through reading text-books. It has to be learnt through hands-on training. So in a way, he makes it very specific art.D- Yes, on the 1st look, it does seem out of scope with words like "social" but apart from that, this, to me, is the only right ans. The author is erroneously equating political know-how with ability to judge the fairness of a law. What is "fairness"? After all, it is the "social implications" of the law-the ways in which ordinary people will be affected.Therefore, it is D for me.

Show Tags

25 Sep 2008, 07:32

KASSALMD wrote:

On the 1st look, A seems to be right but, the author, even though he is generalizing, is also saying that political know-how, unlike other disciplines in life, cannot be learnt through reading text-books. It has to be learnt through hands-on training. So in a way, he makes it very specific art.D- Yes, on the 1st look, it does seem out of scope with words like "social" but apart from that, this, to me, is the only right ans. The author is erroneously equating political know-how with ability to judge the fairness of a law. What is "fairness"? After all, it is the "social implications" of the law-the ways in which ordinary people will be affected.Therefore, it is D for me.

Exactly! Ditto idea. Was torn between A & D. Looked like A is correct.

But if we look at D, the conclusion is not possible if political know-how is not equivalent to understanding of the policy implications, conclusion falls apart. seasoned politicians will not be competent to judge even though they know political know-how

Show Tags

25 Sep 2008, 13:50

I'll go for A.

Below makes sense, but I wouldn't over think it.

KASSALMD wrote:

On the 1st look, A seems to be right but, the author, even though he is generalizing, is also saying that political know-how, unlike other disciplines in life, cannot be learnt through reading text-books. It has to be learnt through hands-on training. So in a way, he makes it very specific art.D- Yes, on the 1st look, it does seem out of scope with words like "social" but apart from that, this, to me, is the only right ans. The author is erroneously equating political know-how with ability to judge the fairness of a law. What is "fairness"? After all, it is the "social implications" of the law-the ways in which ordinary people will be affected.Therefore, it is D for me.

Show Tags

Show Tags

26 Sep 2008, 02:50

Nihit wrote:

No one who lacks knowledge of a subject is competent to pass judgment on that subject. Since political know-how is a matter, not of adhering to technical rules, but of insight and style learned through apprenticeship and experience, only seasoned politicians are competent to judge whether a particular political policy is fair to all.A major weakness of the argument is that it

A. relies on a generalization about the characteristic that makes someone competent to pass judgment

B. fails to give specific examples to illustrate how political know-how can be acquired

C. uses the term apprenticeship to describe what is seldom a formalized relationship

D. equates political know-how with understanding the social implications of political policies

E. assumes that when inexperienced politicians set policy they are guided by the advice of more experienced politicians